If you buy the OS, you should be able to run it on your Car CPU if you can figure out how to get it to run. So I can buy it and leave it on the self and that is ok. But I can't load it on a pc. How is that legal?

Custa1200 wrote:Unless this is being run on Apple hardware this is
ILLEGAL [6]

If you buy the OS, you should be able to run it on your Car CPU if you can figure out how to get it to run. So I can buy it and leave it on the self and that is ok. But I can't load it on a pc. How is that legal?

Well, this is the part where you would break out that good ol' EULA and read it. MacOS is ONLY licenced to run on Apple hardware. So no, you can't run it on your car stereo. Remember, it's you to you to agree to the terms or get your money back. Don't go crying
to nobody because the EULA doesn't let you do what you want to. This is not Windows you're talking about.And if you try to load it on a regular PC system, you might also be in violation of my favourite US law, the DCMA. (Presently living in Germany, I can't wait untill europe gets its own version of this stupid law)

I would seriously like to see this go to court to watch it crash and burn. Oh sure, some pundits would argue that the EULA is hard and fast, but we're also human being here. If I can fit one car's engine into another car, then all the power to me, and
anyone else interested in doing so.

Just out of curiosity, what if I was running an owned copy of tiger on my owned copy of Windows XP Pro on my owned copy of VMWare on my owned iMac Intel with Boot Camp? Does
that make running Tiger in VMWare legal? Afterall I would then be using Apple hardware.

That depends on if you have legal licenses of Windows and VMware. I think they are making VMware free nowadays so I think it would all come down to owning a windows license. If you owned an Intel Mac you would have got your Tiger license included.

(for matt0210): It's actually DMCA, but it doesn't really matter. It will soon be overshadowed by the IPPA (Intellectual Property Protection Act of 2006) submitted to the Senate by Lamar Alexander (R-Tx). If interpreted literally, it would render you
a criminal for disclosing the existence of, or attempting the removal of, a rootkit used within a legitimate software product (i.e. Sony's DRM stupidity). Oh yes people: America knows how to make stupid into stupider.

As far as the lawyers are concerned, you don't own your software. But at least they don't take your license away for computing while drunk.

Indeed. Odd that it's one of few industries where they can retain ownership without the liability for defects or detrimental results thereof. Imagine if leasing a car negated the legal risks for the car companies. Imagine if medicine that caused you harm
were "licensed" to you instead of sold outright, and if doing such would protect the manufacturer from legal retaliation. Amazing. Software licensing is a weird beast indeed.

With legal drugs, the term leasing would be interesting or using like software would also be interesting. How would would you return the drug after you used it and it didn't work? With software I agree to uninstall it and return any delivery media to
the original owner.

In the US, cars are unique in law since they basically are under the rule of "You buy it, you are stuck with it after a short period of time". With general aviation (personal aircraft) you could sue the manufacturer decades after the plane left the factory
for example.

oh well, it seemed funny when I started writing this, but it isn't. See the drug return would have been in bottles filled with ... well, ok.